Laserfiche WebLink
Figure 28 shows the <br />percentage and raw numbers <br />from the surveyed cities who <br />either met, or didn't meet the <br />50-year life cycle spending <br />requirements for each of the <br />three primary construction <br />and maintenance activities. <br />The data from the survey <br />indicates that few cities <br />under 5,000 in population <br />are spending enough in their <br />capital construction and <br />maintenance programs over <br />the last 5 years to maintain a <br />50-year life cycle on their <br />city street systems <br /> <br /> Fioure 28 <br /> Percentage of Small Cities Meeting 50 Year Life Cycle <br /> Spending Levels Avg Spending 1997-2001 <br /> (108 Cities Surveyed) <br /> lEI Cities Not Meeting 50-Year Life Cycle Spending Needs <br /> iD Meeting L Cyc e Spend ng Needs <br /> Cities <br /> 50-Year <br /> fe <br />100% <br />90% <br /> <br /> 70% 71 .................. <br /> 60% ........... 81 <br /> 95 <br /> 50% <br /> 40% <br /> 30% <br /> <br /> 20% .... ~ .... ~7, ~ ............... ~ "~-~,, ,, !~<'~i~i~: -~- <br /> <br /> ComtmctioCReconstmcdon Oveday Sealcoat <br /> <br />Source: 2002 City Road and Bridge Funding Survey <br /> <br />#B-2: Most small cities don't have a regular, annual road budget. <br /> <br />Unlike many of Minnesota's larger cities, the vast majority of smaller cities do not have sufficient <br />revenue bases to afford the luxury of dedicating a regular portion of annual revenues to an ongoing, <br />road construction and maintenance program. These cities will allocate funds to road maintenance and <br />construction only when the priority exceeds other competing government services. <br /> <br />The 2002 City Road and <br />Bridge Funding Survey asked <br />all cities to report on their <br />capital road and bridge <br />construction and maintenance <br />activities, (including <br />construction, reconstruction, <br />overlay, and sealcoating) for <br />the 5-year period from 1997 to <br />2001. Figure 29 shows that of <br />the 108 cities under 5,000 in <br />population who responded to <br />the survey, 65 cities (or 60 <br />percent) reported spending on <br />roadway capital improvements <br />in no more than 2 of the five years. <br /> <br /> 40 <br /> <br />~ 30 <br /> <br />G 2O <br /> <br />~ 10 <br /> <br /> Figure 29 <br /> Mn. Cities Under 5,000 <br />Number of Years from 1997-2001 <br />with a Capital Road Improvement Budget <br />(108 Cities Surveyed) <br /> <br />0 of 5 1 of 5 2 of 5 3 of 5 4 of 5 5 of 5 <br /> <br /> # Yrs w/Capital Budget <br /> <br />This finding suggests that for these smaller cities, limited available <br /> <br />resources prevent them from undertaking any permanent ongoing capital road improvement program. <br /> <br />30 <br /> <br /> <br />